Staff Members - Benha University
Standard versus tubeless mini-percutaneous 5 nephrolithotomy: A randomised controlled trial
• 2015
Publication Information
Authors
Ahmed Sebaey, Mostafa M. Khalil *, Tarek Soliman, Ahmed Mohey,7 Walid Elshaer, Wael Kandil, Rabea Omar
Keywords
Not Available
Journal
Not Available
Publisher
Not Available
Volume
Not Available
Issue
Not Available
Pages
Not Available
publication.type
International
Paper Link
Not Available
Supplementary Materials
Not Available
Abstract
Objective: To prospectively compare the outcome of standard minipercutaneous
nephrolithotomy (SmPCNL) versus tubeless mini-percutaneous
nephrolithotomy (TmPCNL) as primary treatments of renal stones.
Patients and methods: In all, 80 patients with a solitary radio-opaque renal stone
and candidates for PCNL were selected. The patients were randomly divided into
two groups of 40, one group treated with SmPCNL and the other with TmPCNL.
Patients and stone characters, as well as operative and postoperative data of both
groups were compared and statistically analysed.
Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups for patient
demographics and stone characteristics. There was no statistically significant difference
between the two groups for the mean operative time, mean postoperative drop
in haemoglobin, mean postoperative urine leakage, mean hospital stay, and stonefree
rate. The mean (SD) postoperative dose of analgesia was statistically signifi-
cantly higher in the SmPCNL group compared with the TmPCNL group, at 112.5
(48.03) versus 48.8 (43.5) mg, respectively.
Conclusion: Both procedures are safe and effective for managing renal stones,
37 without any significant difference between the two procedures; however, the postop-
38 erative analgesic requirement is significantly higher in SmPCNL.
3940 2015 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Arab Association of 41 Urology. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
nephrolithotomy (SmPCNL) versus tubeless mini-percutaneous
nephrolithotomy (TmPCNL) as primary treatments of renal stones.
Patients and methods: In all, 80 patients with a solitary radio-opaque renal stone
and candidates for PCNL were selected. The patients were randomly divided into
two groups of 40, one group treated with SmPCNL and the other with TmPCNL.
Patients and stone characters, as well as operative and postoperative data of both
groups were compared and statistically analysed.
Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups for patient
demographics and stone characteristics. There was no statistically significant difference
between the two groups for the mean operative time, mean postoperative drop
in haemoglobin, mean postoperative urine leakage, mean hospital stay, and stonefree
rate. The mean (SD) postoperative dose of analgesia was statistically signifi-
cantly higher in the SmPCNL group compared with the TmPCNL group, at 112.5
(48.03) versus 48.8 (43.5) mg, respectively.
Conclusion: Both procedures are safe and effective for managing renal stones,
37 without any significant difference between the two procedures; however, the postop-
38 erative analgesic requirement is significantly higher in SmPCNL.
3940 2015 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Arab Association of 41 Urology. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license